I said in the previous post that in my next installment I would discuss Article V, which covers monetary issues, but I’ve changed my mind. I will, instead, jump to Article VI.

Full disclosure

The first 7 sections of Article VI give Congress the responsibility to keep accurate records for all its operations and puts forth the principle that “there shall be full disclosure and transparency in all the affairs of the Confederacy” (Section 6.) So, secrecy is out. Full disclosure also allows the people to exercise their right to nullify the laws that they don’t like by their voice. These are all the parts of the NAC that deal with this right to nullify:

Article II. Section 2. (24) the right of the people to nullify a law by their voice shall not be abridged;

Article VI. Section 5. Paragraph 2. At the conclusion of each session of Congress, the General Recorder shall publish the full congressional record for that entire session and deliver a copy of it to each member of Congress, and a copy shall also be delivered to each of the State legislatures, and a copy shall also be delivered to each of the main post offices throughout the Confederacy, for free inspection by the general public, that the citizens thereof, should they choose to exercise their right, may nullify by their voice any law they so choose; and all such laws nullified, by the voice of all the citizens of the several States, shall be null and void, and of none effect throughout the land.

Article X. Section 9. All bills passed into law by the voice of Congress and signed into law by the chief judge shall be considered acknowledged by the States and the people thereof; and the States and the people thereof, shall be obliged to abide by them, unless nullified by the citizens by their voice.

There is also Section 8 which is quite specific about the danger of secret combinations and Congress’ duty toward them:

Article VI. Section 8.There shall be no one sworn to secrecy in Congress, nor among any of their Officers, nor in the armed forces, nor in the employ of the Confederacy; and whoso is found combining in secret against Congress, or against the Confederacy, or against any State, or against the American people, or administering or taking secrecy oaths to hide facts from Congress, or to help such as seek power to gain power, or to help to get gain, or to murder, or to rob, or to steal, or to plunder, or to lie, or to commit any manner of crime, contrary to the law, that they might circumvent the law or that they might overthrow the rights and privileges and freedom of these lands, or of other lands and nations and countries, shall be charged and tried for treason; and whatsoever secret society is found to be a secret combination—entering into secret oaths and covenants, that the members of such would protect and preserve one another in whatsoever difficult circumstances they should be placed, that they should not suffer for their crimes, having secret signs and secret words, that they might distinguish a brother who had entered into the covenant, that whatsoever crimes his brother should do, he should not be injured by his brother, nor by those who belong to his band, who have taken the same covenant, swearing by their heads that whoso should vary from the assistance which the band desires should lose his head, and whoso should divulge whatsoever thing the band makes known to them, the same should lose his life, trying those who belong to their band, who reveal to the world their secret plans and plots and agreements and crimes, not according to the laws of their country, but according to the laws of their band—shall not be suffered to exist, but the united States in Congress assembled, upon discovery of such secret works and workers of darkness, shall use every means in their power to destroy all such bands from off the face of the earth, and also to bring to justice all those that build up the same; and whoso is found destroying the records of the Confederacy, to hide facts from Congress, shall also be charged and tried, according to the law.

This leads into the topic of dealing with conspiracies.

Mechanisms against conspiring men

Since joining the Mormon church I, like many other Mormons, have learned to take the conspiratorial view of history. My (very Mormon) understanding is that conspiring men (and women) have put a whole lot of conspiratorial laws on the books, both at the national government and State levels, and even on the local levels. By conspiratorial laws, I mean those laws that conspiring men (and women) have crafted under some false guise or ruse, but which only seek to undermine American society by emasculating the American men, taking away their rights and privileges, and consolidating their stolen masculine power into the hands of pretty much only the government.

When I wrote the NAC, I had a specific plan in mind, and I followed through in it, but as time went on, I kept getting more thoughts which added significantly to the NAC, making it altogether something different than my original plan. Of note is that the original plan did not have any mechanisms to deal with conspirators in it. It was just a Confederacy. But as I wrote, a certain conspiratorial element began weaving its way into the text, giving mechanisms for dealing with conspiring men and women. One of those mechanisms is the right of the majority to nullify any law they want by their voice.

A couple of examples of conspiratorial laws

Gun control laws, for example, are an example of conspiratorial laws. A disarmed people is quite useful if your goal is to conquer that people, so doing away with the right to keep and bear arms under the guise of safety and security is merely a ruse, and is conspiratorial.

Another example is, for example, the VAWA (Violence Against Women Act.) A man can get his right to keep and bear arms and his right to see his children taken away, not because he did something wrong, but because someone claimed they felt threatened by him. The un-American notion of “guilty until proven innocent” is being thrust upon society by VAWA and other laws. Such laws are all conspiratorial.

It’s all about the men

Men are the target of the conspirators, not the women or the children. The men must be taken out, but they cannot in their empowered state, so they must be emasculated. Think of the temple ceremony. Did Satan approach Adam or Eve first? Who was his primary target? It was Adam. Did Adam buckle? Nope. Adam was adamant in keeping God’s commandments. So then Satan approached Eve. Why? Was it to destroy Eve? Nope, it was to destroy Adam. Adam was still the target. Eve was weak even in her non-fallen state. She was an easy kill. Eve, in her non-fallen state, was tempted and ate of the fruit. She was weak before the fall, despite being in a translated body, and she remained weak after, in her now mortal body. Adam was strong before and also after. Adam fell on purpose, not because he was tempted.

In like manner, all conspirators target the men, for they are guided by Satan, who gives them their plans. The plan is ever the same, destroy the men (not the women.) How? By empowering the women with masculine power. This will emasculate the men, and then the weakened men can be killed, along with their women.

Manus for protection

God put women under manus for a reason. Men are powerful. Even against Satan they are powerful. Manus is a protection to women and children, not only from other men, but also from Satan.Manus, then, must be destroyed. (And manus has, in fact, been destroyed. But the NAC would restore it.)

The destruction or disMANtling of manus frees women from the protection of men and emasculates the men. But that is not enough, for even a man free of manus (and thus women and children) is still powerful. A single man with no one under his manus is still a huge threat, as long as his rights and privileges are intact. So, the elimination of manus is not the whole goal, but the emergence of a perversion, which I could call womanus.

Womanus for perversion

Womanus is having men and children under the power of a woman, so that she rules over them. Also, the conspirators seek to put children over the men, again as their rulers. The conspirators do not mind women and children ruling over the men because they are relatively weak compared to the men. Therefore, once the men are sufficiently emasculated and the women and children rule over them, both men, women and children can easily be wiped out or enslaved.

Womanus, of course, is a pure fiction. It does not exist, nor ever can, for women and children are too weak to rule over men unless they are empowered by some external masculine entity, such as the State’s male police force. Thus evil men are conspiring against all other men under the guise of equality. The whole thing is a ruse to put evil men in power, ruling over other men (and over everyone else). To be plainer, this isn’t about the rights or empowerment of women or children, at all, but simply about a few men wanting to be kings over other men. In other words, these conspiring men want all other men to be put under theirmanus.

Dealing with conspiratorial laws

There are three branches of power through which all conspiracies function in government. The first, (and this is not in any particular order,) is through the force of arms, called the police state or even a standing army. The second is though conspiratorial laws, which are laws that abridge the rights of man and pervert the established orders. The third is through wicked judges and rulers.

The NAC provides provisions to deal with a standing army (by banning it in times of peace) :

Article II. Section 2. (3) because of the extreme danger posed to liberty, there shall be no standing army in times of peace, and military conscription shall be abolished forever;

and to deal with a police state (by creating a super-armed society) :

Article II. Section 2. (1) as a well-armed populace, skilled in the use of all weapons, is essential for the security of the United States—in order to wage warfare against any enemy, foreign or domestic, that should threaten any of their rights—the right of the people to make, keep, bear and carry all manner of weapons of every kind, openly or concealed, shall not be infringed nor regulated;

Article IX. Section 9. Paragraph 5. When men enlist in the armed forces, they shall have power to bring with them all their weapons of war, if they have them, and to retain and use them during battle, and Congress shall also supply the armed forces with other weapons and ammunition, and with other needed supplies, that the armed forces shall have all it needs, in abundance, to defend the Confederacy lands; and if the supplies of the armed forces are greatly reduced during wartime, each State shall open its militia supplies to the armed forces, by writ of Congress, to defend the land, and after a war is over and peace has been declared by Congress, all weapons and supplies, which are left, shall be returned to the rightful owners.

Article XII. Section 6. Any State that has one or more international points of entry, or an international land or sea border, shall have power to restrict, according to law, imported goods brought through such entry points and borders, by any person, excepting personal weapons.

and also to deal with conspiratorial laws (through the right to nullify by the people’s voice.) It also provides a mechanism to route out government corruption (through the right of grand juries to file presentments) :

Article II. Section 2. (10) the right of grand juries to file presentments shall not be abridged or regulated;

But it remains silent on wicked judges, providing no mechanisms for that, for that is a State’s issue, and it would trample on the rights of the States if the NAC were to provide those mechanisms. So, wicked, unjust judges must be dealt with by the people of each State, through mechanisms they, themselves, come up with, or by creating and applying the mechanism given by king Mosiah in Mosiah 29:28-29:

And now if ye have judges, and they do not judge you according to the law which has been given, ye can cause that they may be judged of a higher judge.

If your higher judges do not judge righteous judgments, ye shall cause that a small number of your lower judges should be gathered together, and they shall judge your higher judges, according to the voice of the people.

Although king Mosiah’s mechanism is not in the NAC, the foundation of libertyIS found in the NAC, which is the principle of doing business by the voice of the people, which is the right of the majority to choose their rulers. (We Americans are said to be ruled by law, and not by men or kings, and as we choose our laws, we thus choose our rulers.) Therefore, if the people of any State wishes to implement king Mosiah’s mechanism to weed out the wicked judges in their State, the NAC provides a legal precedent for that.

Now, concerning conspiratorial laws, evil king-men have already written many such laws (and more are coming to a State near you.) And it is very easy to determine which laws are conspiratorial and which are not: everything and anything that emasculates American men, or which removes their rights and privileges, or which empowers women and children with stolen masculine power, is part of the conspiracy. It is a “confound and confuse, and then conquer” strategy. All role erversals are conspiratorial. Example tactics: switch “children of men” to “children of women;” do away with manus and say it’s an “equal partnership,” but treat it literally as womanus. Put everything in the power of women. Foster manly qualities in women and womanly qualities in men. Blur gender as much as possible. Make all these things laws and enforce them with the police state. Etc.

The right to nullify must be applied

States have been overrun with conspirators, just like the national government. After passage of the NAC, grass root organizations need to be established to review the laws of each State, and all laws which subvert the rights and privileges of the people, or which reverse the proper order, need to be nullified. In other words, the NAC fully cleans house on the Confederacy level but only gives “cleaning supplies” to the people so that they can clean their State and local houses, as well as keep the Confederacy spotless. Unless the people use these supplies, the State and local governments will remain full of oppressive conspiratorial laws.

For those who aren’t aware of these conspiracies, an example

During my junior year in high school, the nuns asked about our plans for after we graduated. When I said I was going to attend State University, I noticed their disappointment. I asked my favorite nun, “Why?” She answered, “That means you’ll leave four years later a communist and an atheist!”

What a giggle we girls had over that. “How ridiculously unsophisticated these nuns are,” we thought. Then I went to the university and four years later walked out a communist and an atheist, just as my sister Katie had six years before me. (Taken from Feminism is Communism)

When I was a missionary I began to notice a pattern in the people that I talked to. Those who went to a four year university were all professed atheists. So I began, early on, when I saw this pattern, to asked each person who said they were an atheist the following question: “Did you attend a university?” Inevitably they said, “Yes.” So, I would then ask them, “Did you have faith in God before you went to the university?” Inevitably they all said, “Yes, but during school I changed my views.” Now, that is just anecdotal, but I asked these same questions throughout my mission and not a single person answered me any differently. For all appearances, the four year universities were churning out atheists of all the believers in God that entered them.

It was 1969. Kate invited me to join her for a gathering at the home of her friend, Lila Karp. They called the assemblage a “consciousness-raising-group,” a typical communist exercise, something practiced in Maoist China. We gathered at a large table as the chairperson opened the meeting with a back-and-forth recitation, like a Litany, a type of prayer done in Catholic Church. But now it was Marxism, the Church of the Left, mimicking religious practice:

“Why are we here today?” she asked.

“To make revolution,” they answered.

“What kind of revolution?” she replied.

“The Cultural Revolution,” they chanted.

“And how do we make Cultural Revolution?” she demanded.

“By destroying the American family!” they answered.

“How do we destroy the family?” she came back.

“By destroying the American Patriarch,” they cried exuberantly.

“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?” she replied.

“By taking away his power!”

“How do we do that?”

“By destroying monogamy!” they shouted.

“How can we destroy monogamy?”

Their answer left me dumbstruck, breathless, disbelieving my ears. Was I on planet earth? Who were these people?

They proceeded with a long discussion on how to advance these goals by establishing The National Organization of Women. It was clear they desired nothing less than the utter deconstruction of Western society. The upshot was that the only way to do this was “to invade every American institution. Every one must be permeated with ‘The Revolution’”: The media, the educational system, universities, high schools, K-12, school boards, etc.; then, the judiciary, the legislatures, the executive branches and even the library system. (Taken from Feminism is Communism)

All of the main conspiracies focus their attention mainly on destroying the patriarchy. Can you guess why? Remember Satan’s target? It wasn’t Eve, it was Adam. Adam was the patriarch in a patriarchal reign. Now, it needs to be understood that Mormonism IS a patriarchy. Period. Patriarchy is not a man-made concept, but is divine. Our Father is God. He is our Patriarch. He is our King. His Firstborn Son has the right to rule. His name is Jesus Christ. This is how patriarchal reigns work, with the father as king and the firstborn son as his heir to the throne.

Lucifer, in the pre-mortal existence, attempted to destroy the Patriarchy that existed there. He tried to overthrow the Patriarch (God) by becoming himself the heir to the throne, even though he wasn’t the Firstborn Spirit Son. His coup, though, didn’t work and he was thrown out of heaven and cast down to earth.

Without going into a full exposition of this topic, Satan is doing the very same thing here on earth that he tried to do in the heavens above. DOWN WITH THE PATRIARCHY! is the rhetoric. Satan is a rebellious son that opposes all patriarchies, because patriarchies are ordained of God.

“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?” she replied.

“By taking away his power!”

“Taking away his power” means emasculation. The NAC, then, is a corrective to this extremely old satanic plan to destroy the world by destroying the power of men. The NAC corrects the situation by re-empowering the men with stolen masculine power, and by emasculating the women. Note that this is a reversal of what has been going on, for men have been emasculated and women have been empowered. The NAC, then, turns things upside down from where they currently are. In other words, the NAC is a restoration.

And now behold, is the meaning of the word restoration to take a thing of a natural state and place it in an unnatural state, or to place it in a state opposite to its nature? O, my son, this is not the case; but the meaning of the word restoration is to bring back again [this for this and that for that]… (Alma 41:12-13)

The natural state of men is fully empowered with masculine power, strength, authority and control. The natural state of women is weakness. Just as it is wrong or improper to take That Which Acts and That Which Is Acted Upon and switch the roles, so that the element now pushes the spirit around, so it is a perversion to empower women with masculine power and weaken men as if they were women. The element chose to be pushed around, even to be acted upon. In like manner, the spirit chose to act and to push the element around. This is the joy of their creation, to do (or not to do) these things, according to their choice. If you force the one to do the other’s job, there is no joy, only misery, for they are not fulfilling their creation.

The deception of the devil is to get us to believe what we used to not believe, and to get us to not believe what we used to believe, and to do what we never would have done, and not do what we definitely would have done. In the heavens every one of us made covenants and rejoiced over Father’s patriarchal reign. We were all for and loved the Patriarchy and it was us that kicked the devil out for challenging Father’s kingdom. But here on earth we can be deceived by the devil.

I know a woman who can’t wait until the day of judgment, so that she can “give God a piece of her mind.” She hates the patriarchal system. What she doesn’t realize is that these thoughts proceed from Satan, not from her. She is possessed of his evil spirit and so, like the devil, fights and hates God and His patriarchy. The devil wants to give God a piece of his mind, doesn’t he? The devil doesn’t repent and is capable of standing before God and defying Him, but she isn’t the devil. She is merely acting under a demonic deception. Upon her death and resurrection she will be brought back into the presence of God and she will remember her pre-mortal covenant that she made, in which she swore allegiance to God’s patriarchy and said she would not fall for the devil’s trickery and deception. She would not be deceived but would support the kingdom of God no matter what. Then all her defiance and defiant attitude will vanish away in an instant upon her resurrection (for the devil must retreat) and she will realize that those weren’t her thoughts, but thoughts implanted by the devil. She loved God and His kingdom, but she will have to put her head down in shame at that day, knowing that she has failed the test.

Propaganda and law

Many of these conspiratorial laws are based upon false propaganda. In other words, lies. (And Satan is called the father of lies.) Now the universities and schools of all grades are used by the conspirators to indoctrinate the masses in false propaganda, so that they accept and believe the false premises of the conspiratorial laws. The NAC deals with this both directly and indirectly. Directly, via the right to nullify, and indirectly by putting forth the unrestricted and unregulated right to homeschool. It may not appear so important a right, but re-empowering parents with the right to teach their own children can create the foundation for the destruction of the entire propaganda mechanism in place among both the public and private school systems and also in the mainstream media. Simply put, homeschooled kids typically learn how to critically think and detect falsehoods. Homeschooled kids are less likely, then, to believe the BS in the schools and media, nullifying their effect. Thus, the homeschooling right can be considered yet another tool to combat these conspiracies.

No jury nullification

In case someone brings this up, the NAC does not provide a jury nullification mechanism because jury nullification violates the rights of the majority, which is the voice of the people. The voice of the people installed the law. They alone have the right to alter it or abolish it or nullify it, not a minority on a jury. So, the NAC gives, instead, the moral and correct right of nullification by voice, which is the foundation of liberty I mentioned above.

Once again, I will not use these NAC posts to fully expound the various principles given in them. Maybe some other day I will take the time to unfold all this stuff completely. Now, in my next post I really will (I think) cover the money sections of the NAC. Feel free to disagree on any point mentioned in this post. Bring your strongest reasons against the NAC and let’s have an open debate. And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.

On January 21, 1786, the Virginia Legislature, following James Madison’s recommendation, invited all the states to send delegates to Annapolis, Maryland to discuss ways to reduce interstate conflict. At what came to be known as the Annapolis Convention, the few state delegates in attendance endorsed a motion that called for all states to meet in Philadelphia in May 1787 to discuss ways to improve the Articles of Confederation in a “Grand Convention.” Although the states’ representatives to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia were only authorized to amend the Articles, the representatives held secret, closed-door sessions and wrote a new constitution.

So, they were supposed to fix the Articles of Confederation (AOC) but the nationalists among them decided to scrap the Confederacy that the AOC established and write something new, without authorization from their States, which thing would create a national government. Most Americans say, “So, what? The U. S. Constitution (USC) is the greatest political document in the world.”

You must look at the Constitution in this way

Those who defend the USC do so without understanding, for they do not separate the USC, which was written by the nationalists, from the Bill of Rights, which was a product of the minds of the federalists. The nationalists who wrote the USC in secret wanted to impose a strong national (centrist) government upon the States and saw no need for a Bill of Rights to protect the people from the monster they were creating. In fact, they argued that having a Bill of Rights would be bad! Luckily, (or speaking more truthfully), by divine grace, God inspired the federalists to insist upon a Bill of Rights, which were added as the first 10 Amendments. But the nationalists ever thought their creation (the USC) was perfect as is, without the Bill of Rights.

When you look at history, think about how abusive the national government has been, encroaching on the rights of the people just about every chance it has had. Now, think about what is the only thing that has somewhat checked these tyrannical abuses of power. Has it not been the Bill of Rights? Yes, of course it has. Now, imagine how history would have been different had those nationalist conspirators—who usurped their delegated States’ authority and wrote the USC in secret—had their way, and released it upon the American people without a Bill of Rights. Can you imagine the horrors we would have had from the very beginning? We see horrors among us today and say that the government has grown too large and too centralized, but this growth took hundreds of years to occur because of the restraints the Bill of Rights put upon government. Without the Bill of Rights, government would have ballooned overnight and the horrors we see today would have existed two hundred years ago.

When you look at the USC, then, you must see it as its creators saw it: sans a Bill of Rights and about as perfect as mortal man could make it. And that, in fact, is the problem with the USC. It is man-made law, which God has said brings men into bondage, for this is what the laws of men have always done and been designed to do: to bring men into all types of bondage, so that men can rule over their fellow man and enrich themselves with other men’s goods.

So, all those who extoll the virtues of the USC are not praising the USC, for there is nothing particularly good about it, but their praise is for the Bill of Rights, which is cause for celebration. And that is the part that was inspired of God. For God needed to restrain this thing that had been created in secret, for a time, until, when it became the behemoth it now is, gobbling up every right and power it can find, God could work a work of restoration and bring us back to where we first went awry.

The NAC is a reset

It was always the intention of God that those delegates fix the AOC, but they didn’t do it. So, God is going to fix the AOC with the NAC (or something like it), because God’s purposes are never frustrated. In the end, He always get what He wants. In this case, we are going to be taken back to a Confederacy, as if we were transported back in time to May 1787. It is going to be as if those unfaithful delegates actually did their appointed job and corrected the AOC under inspiration of God. It is going to be as if the USC never existed (save for all the history we had under it). It will be a complete reset.

A Confederacy is superior to a National Government

The NAC’s Confederacy has token similarities to the national government established by the USC. There is a bicameral Congress composed of a Senate and a House of Representatives. There are two Senators per State and multiple Representatives per population apportionment. But that is pretty much where the similarities end.

In essence the NAC is a pure Confederacy of States. The Congress represents the States and their interests, not the people. No one is popularly elected, like under the USC, but all are appointed by the State governments. Nevertheless, there is interaction with the people because they (the people) get to approve or disapprove of all those appointments. This corresponds, basically, to the law of common consent. Thus, the NAC’s Confederacy has perfect legitimacy on all levels.

Unlike the USC, which has enormous powers, the NAC’s Confederacy has extremely limited powers that deal with State issues. The Confederacy is mainly concerned with defense, but also has power to make treaties, regulate the border crossings of foreigners, provide a sound monetary source, a post office, resolve disputes between States, and little else. This Confederacy, in fact, might seem weak on the surface, but it makes for an extremely dynamic and diverse society, which is fully protected from any foe, whether foreign or domestic.

The so-called “dynamic” American economy currently under the USC is but the symbol or shadow of the economy that would exist literally under the NAC. The USC has the economy under a whole lot of restraints at present, yet it still chugs along “dynamically” (so-called). The NAC, though, unleashes the full American economy, freeing it from its restraints, allowing the Lord to finally give the Gentiles a taste of what the Nephites had. Everything becomes, or will become, literally dynamic, on all levels, in a never-ending spiral of (non-miraculous) prosperity. (And yet, even this won’t be what God has in store for us. But you have to start somewhere, right? So, the NAC shouldn’t be considered the prosperity miracle, but just a set-up forthe prosperity miracle which is to come.)

Again, the national government under the USC restrains, while the Confederacy under the NAC will set all things free of restraints. Yet it also will keep us safe and secure, so there is no trade-off. We need not choose between the security of the USC and the freedom of the NAC. The NAC will secure us more fully than the USC does and will also give us greater freedoms, so it is superior to the USC on literally every point.

Secret combinations, political parties and special interests

Do you remember what happened a mere five years after king Mosiah did away with the monarchy and established a system of judges? Sure, the people rejoiced in their new-found freedom, but a certain set of men were ticked off at this change of events because there was no longer a centralized position of power in the government from which to rule over men. They wanted to be kings over men, but they couldn’t because king Mosiah changed the dang laws! Everything was too decentralized for power hungry people to be able to control anything. So, just five years into the reign of the judges, Amlici of the Nehors appeared on the scene:

And it came to pass in the commencement of the fifth year of their reign there began to be a contention among the people; for a certain man, being called Amlici, he being a very cunning man, yea, a wise man as to the wisdom of the world, he being after the order of the man that slew Gideon by the sword, who was executed according to the law—now this Amlici had, by his cunning, drawn away much people after him; even so much that they began to be very powerful; and they began to endeavor to establish Amlici to be a king over the people. (Alma 2:1-2)

In like manner, there are to be wicked and conspiring men among the Gentiles:

Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you:

In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiringmen in the last days, I have warned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelation— (D&C 89:4)

These same conspiring men, who have genetically modified our food, who have poisoned our water supplies, who have conspired to put toxic chemicals into our bodies and the bodies of our children, in the name of science and medicine, who have promoted sexual liberation and abortion that they might be able to farm human body parts (of the aborted children), etc., all for gain, fame, honors of men and power, these very same men (and also women) have a vested interest in the national government, for although it is not a monarchy with a king, it still nevertheless represents kingly authority over men, which is what these conspiring men need and desire in order for them to obtain their riches and dominion over men.

So, it should not come as a surprise that there will be intense opposition to the NAC once it starts to gain traction among the people. And it should not come as a surprise that even after the NAC (or something like it) is installed as the Supreme Law of the land, that just a short time afterward there will be calls for it to be changed into something that allows for either a king-type of office or kingly authority over men. In other words, these same men aren’t going to go away without a fight, and even after their power and control is taken away from them by the NAC, they will use every means in their power to re-gain the lost ground and powerful positions they had, even if it means conspiring with our enemies to wage war against America, to bring it back to a national government.

This means that on the one hand the NAC will destroy secret combinations and conspiring men, during the time that it is the law, but on the other hand, so all-pervasively destructive will the NAC be to tyranny that all would-be tyrants will be forced to use excessive measures to restore their thrones, so war will be inevitable under the NAC. There will be forces both within our borders and also outside of them trying to take the NAC out. Even if the conspirators in this country are all arrested and put down, the conspirators in other countries will not sit idly by and watch the great prize of America be literally snatched from their fingers by the NAC.

The NAC foresees all of this

Although it could be technically correct to say that the NAC’s Confederacy is weaker than the national government under the USC, the powers vested in the Confederacy by the NAC are specific and sufficiently powerful to deal with these conspiring enemies of the people. The NAC already foresees that such secret combinations will exist, and that they will attempt to destroy the NAC and return the people to the USC, or to bring about an even stronger government, such as a world government, and the NAC plans for these conspiracies. In other words, although the specific powers of the Confederacy are extremely limited, they are also extremely powerful and perfectly requisite in dealing with all enemies whether foreign and domestic. Even if the entire world conspires against America under the NAC, and decides to wage war against us, the NAC provides for this contingencyand will be able to see us through it.

The USC’s national government has no power to restrain conspirators

In contrast, the national government under the USC is a breeding ground for conspiring men and corruption. Not only is there a continual push to consolidate all power under the executive branch (the President), for that is the office that most closely matches a king, but all branches of government routinely grab at whatsoever new power and authority they can steal from the people, representing the continuous manifestation of kingly authority over men. Additionally, although having a real king would be magnificent to these evil people, they would really love to have a world king, and so they also push for world government and to do away altogether with the sovereign nation-state. These things happen, or can happen, under the USC, because it is man-made and has no foresight whatsoever. In other words, fore-sight comes of the Spirit of freedom, even the Holy Ghost, which is the spirit of prophecy and revelation. Man-made documents can’t see the future and so must just guess as to what is actually needed. Most times these guesses are all wrong because of the change in conditions that inevitably comes, which no one ever saw coming.

The USC doesn’t provide for conspiring men because why should it? It was crafted by conspiracy and conspiring men, after all! Why in the world would conspiring men put safeguards in the very document they are creating to make it impossible for conspiring men to take control? The USC, then, as a creation of conspiring men, was designed to be a vehicle that could be used to control the States, not to free them or the people. (The Bill of Rights, on the other hand, was designed to be a vehicle that could be used to control the USC.) The USC didn’t make the States or their people any freer than they already were under the AOC. Its sole function was to consolidate stolen State power in the hands of a few men (Congress, the Justices and the President) under the guise as this would make us safer or more protected, militarily, and also more prosperous if commerce could be regulated.

But all of this was just false propaganda playing on men’s fears. This is even the tactic used by evil men today. If you can instill a false fear in the population, you can make them give up anything, even their rights and privileges.

The NAC keeps State rights intact, the USC doesn’t

The States are sovereign and were ever meant to be. Contrary to what people might think, God does not approve of sameness. He likes diversity. Thus a male is a male and a female is a female. They are not designed or intended to be unisex, or the same. Diversity is the name of the game in the divine economy of God. “Sovereign States in a Confederacy” creates diversity among the States. They become more nation-like under a Confederacy, while under a national government there is a certain conformity that takes place with much less diversity and no sovereignty. The rights and independence and sovereignty of the States is fully intact under the NAC. They can freely enter the pact and freely leave it, all done peacefully.

Not so under the USC. The national government is over the States, just as kings were over men. It is the same principle. The national government, then, exerts kingly authority over the States and also over their people. When a State tries to break away, we end up having a civil war or a war between the States. Thus, the national government doesn’t give a hoot about the States or their people. The Feds are in charge and as each day passes, they are more and more in charge, stealing authorities from both the States and their people.

But make no mistake about it, the States are just as tyrannical as the national government, and those in State governments are also trying to do what the Feds are doing, creating their own police state and trying to consolidate what they can steal from the people, under their own authority. This is why the NAC doesn’t just abolish the national government, but also restrains the States from exerting kingly authority over men, like the national government does.

A final word

One more thing about Article IV that makes it stand out is the fact that Congress under the NAC is paid by their respective States. In other words, Congress under the NAC won’t be able to vote themselves a pay raise. Some States will pay more and some States will pay less, to their respective Representatives and Senators. Thus, each State will get what it pays for.

In my next installment I will discuss Article V, which covers monetary issues. Feel free to disagree on any point mentioned in this post. Bring your strongest reasons against the NAC and let’s have an open debate. And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.

Neither the united States in Congress assembled, nor any State, shall have power to raise up a king over men, nor to exert kingly authority over them or their house, for it is not right to esteem one flesh above another, or that one man shall think himself above another, but every man alone shall bear rule in his own house; and as that which is governed by law is also preserved by law, whereas that which breaks a law, and abides not by law, but seeks to become a law unto itself, cannot be preserved by law, neither by mercy, justice, nor judgment, every man shall have power to set his house in order, having his children and house in subjection to him alone with all gravity, even as unto a king, according to the bounds and conditions of his law, that this shall be a land of liberty, and that every man shall enjoy his rights and privileges alike, and that every man shall set in order his family, and that every man shall bear his part.

Section 4.

Neither Congress, nor any State, shall abridge, or regulate in any way, a woman’s right to give birth at home, with our without assistance.

Section 5.

No State, nor any of its agents, shall issue or keep certificates of live birth, except in cases in which the child’s mother has died giving birth and the child has no living relative, for only the father and mother of a child, or the father alone if the child’s mother has died giving birth, or the mother alone if the father is dead or otherwise absent, or some other living relative if the child’s parents are dead or otherwise absent, shall have power to issue certificates of live birth, and to keep the same, except in the case in which the child’s mother has died giving birth and the child has no living relative, and such certificates shall be as equally valid and effective and binding, in the eyes of the law, as those which are issued by any State or its agents.

Section 6.

In order that the people may be instructed more perfectly in theory, in principle, in doctrine, in the law, and in all things that are expedient to understand—of things both in the heavens above and in the earth beneath, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are; things which are at home, things which are abroad; the wars and perplexities of nations, and a knowledge also of countries and of kingdoms—and that all the people may study and learn, and become acquainted with all good books, and with languages, tongues and people; the right and duty of parents to teach their children at home shall not be abridged, nor regulated in any way, neither by any State, nor by Congress, nor by any other branch of government, that children may be brought up in, and taught, truth and words of wisdom out of the best books, by their parents, and that the people may organize themselves and prepare every needful thing, and that every home may be established as a house of learning; but parents shall also have the privilege of performing this duty by sending their children to a school.

Section 7.

Neither Congress, nor any State, shall assign a number to the name or person of any of the inhabitants of Confederacy lands.

As explained in my previous post, the NAC creates a new (really an old) jurisdiction by re-introducing (restoring) the ancient concept of manus, so that a married man now has his own law:

Article III. Section 3.

No State shall have power to divorce men who exercise their right to marry wives with manus, from their wives, nor shall the right and power of such men to issue a writ of divorcement, on their own authority, be abridged or regulated in any way, and such writs shall be binding and valid and final and unalterable decrees in the eyes of the law, so that the law shall view a wife so divorced as loosed from the law of her husband.

This makes the man a legislator. All government has three branches: legislative, executive and judicial. The national government established by the USC has these three branches which are separated, but the new jurisdiction created by the NAC restores the ancient concept of men as kings.

The NAC’s Article III. Section 2.

From the dictionary, a king is “a male monarch of a major territorial unit; especially: one whose position is hereditary and who rules for life.” Under the NAC, men become minor kings, or male monarchs of a minor territorial unit, namely, over their house and family. As kings, they have both legislative, executive and judicial powers. Thus, Section 2 says, “every man alone shall bear rule in his own house,” and “every man shall have power to set his house in order,” and “every man shall set in order his family,” which clauses embody executive and judicial powers, while the clause, “according to the bounds and conditions of his law” shows that he also has legislative power.

This is yet another restoration, for from the very beginning men were made kings. But as the NAC puts restraints on all levels of government, even the fundamental level of a man’s house law is said to have “bounds and conditions,” thus allowing an interaction between the fundamental law of a man and the laws of society in general. This is important, for tyrants can appear anywhere, but all men are re-empowered by the NAC, as men were from the beginning, to reign over their house and family, and over their children in particular, to judge them, and to make laws for them, and to set them in order, using his executive power, being endowed with those masculine powers and strengths that actually allow him to subdue and subject whatsoever is around him. As I stated in a previous comment concerning rebellion, this duty to deal with rebellion falls principally upon fathers, and should fathers become emasculated to the point where they can no longer subject their children (as it is today under the USC), society must crumble into a mob of criminals.

The NAC, then, deals with criminality at the fundamental level, by re-empowering the men, and fathers in particular, so that everyone that leaves his or her father’s house will have learned to respect the laws of society, having already been made subject to their father’s law. Under the USC, criminality is fostered, for fathers are emasculated, creating rebellion and dissent in their house, and it is the police state which then has the responsibility of dealing with these now rebellious adults who do not respect any authority, at all.

Just as I stated in the first post of this series, concerning the super-armed citizens becoming a sort of unofficial police force, even so the men and fathers of society, under the NAC, are likewise empowered to police their own, even as kings. There are very valid reasons why God has endowed men with all that they have been given, meaning all the incredible physical strength and prowess and mental powers. These things are needed, in order for them to set their families in order and deal with whatsoever obstacles come their way. It is to the benefit of society as a whole that such powers are returned to men, therefore, the NAC restores them.

And the NAC doesn’t mince words, either, using the phrase “even as unto a king” to describe the subjection that children are supposed to have to their fathers. But kings over men are expressly prohibited. And even kingly authority over men is prohibited.

Now, certainly we Americans can claim we have no king over men, but there can be no doubt that kingly authority is being exerted over them and their house. Currently men can be hauled off to jail for a great many things if they seek to set in order their house. And the State is increasingly interested and seeking to control all aspects of a family and house, so that the State becomes the parent or father. The NAC does away entirely with these tyrannical power grabs, but without leaving a vacuum. No, in the absence of false State “fatherly” powers, the real fathers are given back the powers the State stole from them in the first place. So, the NAC shows itself superior, yet again, to the USC.

The NAC’s Article III. Sections 4-6.

The State’s stolen “fatherly” powers, inappropriately called by people, “the nanny State,” currently reach (or try to reach) into all levels and areas of the family. Without going into a lengthy discussion on the topic, the first two sentences of the entry of Communism from the New World Encyclopedia are instructive:

Communism refers to a theory for revolutionary change and political and socioeconomic organization based on common control of the means of production as opposed to private ownership. While communism or Marxism-Leninism, as it is known, champions economic justice, it views social revolution and the violent overthrow of the existing social order as essential components in the process.

So, the State seeks, in a very great many instances, to control everything it can, including the family itself, by these stolen masculine powers. Children, then, are not viewed as belonging to parents (“private ownership”), but to “society,” which the above entry calls “common control” (meaning the State.) Those children are fodder for the State organism. They represent both future taxpayers and future soldiers. Thus, knowledge about the children of America, and about Americans in general, is needed by the State, in order to plan for the future. Specifically, it needs to know how many people are in America, and how many are men and how many are women and what their ages are, and when they were born and so on and so forth. This information is vital to the growth of every State that wishes to control all things.

The NAC combats the tyranny of central control of all things by restoration, restoring to parents their private rights over their children, and also by prohibition, prohibiting the State from knowing much of anything, and also by disclosure, causing the State to disclose all its business to the people. In other words, it essentially says to the State, “I know what evil is in your hearts and what you are planning in secret places, and it ain’t gonna work.” It supplies to the people a set of tools that completely undermine such tendencies toward consolidation of State power.

The State wants to know how many births there are in this country, and how many are boys and how many are boys. The NAC says, “Women have the right to home birth, even without an assistant, and you, State, can’t regulate this.” This keeps the State completely in the dark concerning these numbers, for there are a great many home births in this country, but if there is no assistant, there is no one to report to the State these numbers. The State, then cannot get an accurate handle on births, because of Section 4 of Article III.

“But,” says the State, “many people go to hospitals, therefore, there we will get the rest of the numbers, so we can have some accurate projections for our secret plans.” But Section 5 stops the agents of the State from keeping birth certificates, except in rare cases, as stated in the Section, therefore the State is once again left in the dark. As it should be.

“Ah, but when the children go to school, then we will know the numbers!” says the State. Well, not really, because parents have a right to homeschool their kids, per Section 6, and that also can’t be regulated, so it sucks to be you, State, but the NAC has stopped you yet again.

What ends up happening, then, is the State is left with inaccurate numbers and a lot of guesswork. But what about the enumeration that is supposed to occur every 10 years? Surely that is where the State will gets its handle on the numbers, right? The U.S. Census Bureau to the rescue! Unfortunately for the State, the NAC says this:

The Number of Representatives in the House shall ever be no less than Four Hundred Ninety. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct, but as all population enumerations pose a danger to the lives, liberty and property of the people, all such enumerations shall consist solely of the whole number of inhabitants, and of the number of said inhabitants which are Indians not taxed, and of the number of non-Indians not taxed which are males aged twenty years or older, and in no case shall names, or sexes, or ages, or citizenship statuses, or any other data be gathered in the enumeration. At all times, regardless of enumeration, each State shall have at Least one Representative.

Yet again, the State is stopped in its march towards centralization of power and war, by taking away its power to actually know anything much about the people. (And in case anyone is wondering, yes, I did have Monty Python’s Holy Hand Grenade scene from their Holy Grail movie in mind when I wrote the above paragraph of the NAC: )

“Ah, but what about driver’s licenses?” you might ask. “Everyone uses a car to drive around, right? That is how they’ll get the numbers!” Well, as explained in the previous post, the State can’t license the right to travel under the NAC, either, so driver’s licenses are out, too.

The NAC’s Article III. Sections 7.

Now, Section 7 stops the State from assigning a number to people. So, if the State tries to use the records of the previous national government, or some other means that the NAC hasn’t thought of, to get around all these restrictions, they still can’t attach a number to a name or person. It is really hard to keep track of a population if you can’t put a unique number to each person. So, I wish any State that tries to do so the best of luck.

The result of these sections

The NAC’s family sections firmly establish the family as the fundamental unit of society and the father as the fundamental governmental unit. The NAC, then, fulfills the imperative of The Family: A Proclamation to the World, “to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.” The USC, in contrast, is silent on all these topics, and under it, all we have seen is “the violent overthrow of the existing social order” (the family unit and its government.) Under the USC, the family has been broken apart and re-defined and its government has been fully disMANtled. Women empowered by the strong arm of the State, as well as the State (for the State empowers no one without strings attached), now “govern” the family, which allows children to grow up in rebellion, following in the footsteps of their rebellious mothers, all with State sanction and approval, (for the destruction of the family is one of the not-so-secret plans), and emasculated fathers and husbands, unable to deal with the State’s strong arm, are beginning to become wise to the situation and are “opting out.” But State deception has men completely fooled and so the angst and frustration these men feel is directed at the usurping women, and not at the State which falsely empowers them with stolen masculine rights and authority. Men must wake up and see the deception around them. They must recognize that women are not to blame, for they are simply following after their natures, as they always have. It is the false empowerment of the State that is the primary cause of the situation. The State must be emasculated and the stolen powers returned to their rightful owners: the men. But this is impossible under the USC. So the USC must go and in its place the NAC will restore both the family and its original and legitimate government.

Now, for those who take issue with the NAC over the establishment, or re-establishment of men over their families, as kings, it must be understood that from the beginning, from the very first family, and onward, the fundamental governmental unit has always been, and ever shall be, the king over his kingdom. Not a democracy, not a confederacy, not a republic, or anything else. All these other forms of government were later inventions. The first and best form of government has always been the just king:

Therefore, if it were possible that you could have just men to be your kings, who would establish the laws of God, and judge this people according to his commandments, yea, if ye could have men for your kings who would do even as my father Benjamin did for this people—I say unto you, if this could always be the case then it would be expedient that ye should always have kings to rule over you. (Mosiah 29:13)

I will not expound this principle in this post. Suffice it to say that for the fundamental unit of society, which is the family, the father-king is the original and best form of family government, and, in point of fact, the only divinely approved form for that unit. The NAC, then, abolishes one form of government, (the national government under the USC), and replaces it with a multitude of father-kings, which is a restoration, for from the beginning the world was filled up with father-kingdoms. At the same time, the NAC prohibits the later invention of “king over men” and also the even later invention of “kingly authority over men,” while allowing the States to continue functioning as democratic republics on the macro level and as a Confederacy between States. The NAC allows these because they do not interfere with the rights of the fundamental units and governments, whereas “king over men” and governments which exert “kingly authority over men” do interfere. Thus, every part of the NAC supports that principle of freedom which maintains rights and privileges.

A story

Once upon a time, there was a land of many kings, which bordered a forest infested with ogres. The forest also contained a unique specimen of antelope, whose antlers only grew on the right side of their heads. In ancient times the kings discovered that if they ate these animals, they became endowed with mighty strength, and so it became a practice among them to corral all the various types of this specific specimen of antelope in a certain place in the forest and from time to time the kings would feast on them to renew their strength. The ogres, for their part, craved human flesh and would attack the kings when the urge struck them, but the kings would ever be victorious due to their greater strength. In these wars, here and there a king would fall, while ogres would die in droves.

Now ogres were always very stupid, but one day a new type of smart ogre was born, and when he came of age, he said to his fellows, “Listen to me and I will deliver all the humans into our hands. Behold, it is unwise to attack the humans in their strength. They must first be weakened.”

“How?” asked his brother.

“Behold, the antelope is the source of the kings’ strength. We will steal the antelope and men will become weak,” replied the wise ogre.

“But they will know they are missing and will attack us and slay us and take the animals back,” said another.

The smart ogre continued, “They will not know, for they are not numbered, and so we will wait until dark, and when their watch is sleeping, we will take but one antelope, a small one, even the smallest we can find, and we will bring it back and raise it among us as our own. They will think it has run off and, being insignificant, not worth the effort to retrieve it. Thus, they will begin to become weak. We will wait an entire year…”

“A whole year?” exclaimed a stupid ogre.

“Yes, a whole year, and in that year’s time they will begin to forget they ever had it. None of us will attack them during this time, but we will wait a year and then we will steal another small antelope from them, of the same kind, and we will breed the two we have, to make more for us.”

“But what for?” asked a bewildered ogre.

The cunning ogre continued, “Once we have bred a sufficient number to sustain a population, we will feast upon our antelopes as the humans do. This will make us stronger.”

“Antelope tastes gross!” exclaimed an ogre.

“It is an acquired taste,” continued the genius ogre, “and we will grow to like it. Using this same strategy, each year we will take one more small antelope, and breed, and feast, and wait for man to forget all about the animals we will have stolen, and we will afflict him with peace, so that he doesn’t even realize how weak he has become and how strong we have become, and he will no longer see the need for the antelope. And thus, when we have stolen everything, and feasted, we will attack anew and feast on sweet human flesh!”

And so the ogres put their plan into effect, and became very successful at stealing the antelope. From time to time a king here or there would notice that the antelope were missing and that the now peaceful ogres were ten feet taller than they used to be, and would sound an alarm that the kings were now weak and in danger, but because it was a time of peace, no one paid any attention.

One day, however, a wife of a king had a chance meeting in the forest with the cunning ogre, and as they talked she began to complain about all the work she did while her husband did nothing but boss her and the children around, and how she would love to give him a taste of his own medicine and rule over him! The ogre agreed how unfair and unequal it all was and offered to set things right. Later that night the wise ogre called another ogre meeting and said, “The plans have changed slightly. Instead of attacking the humans from the forest, and have to deal with their strongholds, we will attack them from within their cities and lands.” And he unfolded to them the new plan.

The next day all the ogres walked into the human cities, denouncing human inequality, and declaring that the gores, as impartial and unbiased entities, could set human affairs in order better than the humans themselves, and so the ogres ought to be put in charge. Not everyone was convinced at first, but soon the majority agreed that the plan seemed fair and the ogres began to rule over the humans. In time, their reach invaded all areas of human life and the kings soon realized that they were no longer kings, but servants and slaves to the ogres. Anytime one of their wives or children complained to the ogres about them, the ogres would side with the wives and children and lock the king away, to be devoured secretly by the ogres. In this way, the ogres had a steady supply of sweet human flesh to feast upon from time to time, without a single ogre casualty.

The women and children did not care what happened to their kings, for the ogres let them have their way, something the kings never did, but, despite the new freedoms offered by the ogres, neither the women, nor the children, were happy. In fact, happiness was at an all time low, for everyone, (except the ogres). The women resented the fact that their previously mighty king-husbands, who used to slay ogres for breakfast, were now pushed around by both ogres, women and children. The children resented the fact that their previously mighty king-fathers, who used to have stuffed ogre trophies in their dens, were now made the servant of all. The women and children all secretly desired that their husbands and fathers could and would return to their former strength and authority, but they had become addicted to power and had grown accustomed to the lifestyle afforded by the ogres, in which they could do whatever they wanted, like spoiled brats, and so none voiced these secret desires, but all continued on living out their lives in unhappiness, and blaming the former kings for all their misery.

The men, on the other hand, were also miserable, and put the blame on their wives and upon women, in general, for the women had changed from their former submissive state to a contentious one, in which the ogres were used to threaten the kings into submitting to the women and children.

About the time of the secret great feast, which was when the cunning ogre had planned to throw off the façade and eat up not only most of the men, but also many of the women and children, something new came into the cities of men. It was an idea from the past, concerning the antelopes. It spoke about how in the distant past men were mighty kings because of the antelope and how the ogres had stolen the animals, etc., exposing the whole affair exactly as it had actually happened. It also put forth a plan whereby men could go into the forest, find the antelope, feast upon it, and return to the cities re-empowered, to throw down the rule of the ogres and re-enthrone themselves as kings of their wives and children. It even had a map showing exactly where the ogres were keeping all the antelope. Just a short journey to the spot and all the oppressions and unhappiness would end in an instant.

Most men, at first, upon hearing of this new thing, were skeptical. “It cannot be that easy,” was everyone’s thought. “How could feasting on an antelope fix the situation?” But those who believed the plan persisted until everyone was convinced of its truth: the antelope was the key. An army of men was gathered, forming a majority, all convinced, and they went to the spot on the map. Sure enough, the antelope were there. But would these animals give the men their former strength? The men feasted, hoping the plan would work, then returned to the cities to fight the ogres. In the ensuing battle, here and there a king fell, but the ogres were killed in droves, as before, only this time the ogres were made almost entirely extinct, the few remaining stragglers fleeing back into the forest. Having re-established their kingdoms, the kings ordered the antelopes moved into each city, where they could be properly guarded and protected and numbered, never again to be lost to ogres.

Final words

Once again, more sections of the NAC show its superiority to the USC. Feel free to disagree on any point mentioned in this post. Bring your strongest reasons against the NAC and let’s have an open debate. And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.

Before I get into the marriage sections, I want to address Section 3 of Article II, which says, in part:

…the people of each State shall have free ingress and regress to and from any other State, and to and from other countries, by any mode of conveyance whatsoever in which they desire to exercise their right to travel, without abridgment, regulation, restriction or license…

The right of travel is nearly non-existent in this country under the USC, though I happen to know a guy who has continually won in the courts each time the cops pull him over and find that he doesn’t have a license, but is merely traveling, and the cops now, when they pull him over, recognize him and just tell him to keep on traveling. But that is in my area. In your area, they may be quite adamant that there is not, nor ever was, any right to travel, but under the original Articles of Confederation, it was written right into it, though not as expressly as the NAC has it. Therefore, the NAC is orders of magnitude better than the original Articles. Under the NAC, people are going to finally know what real freedom feels like…

NAC Article III. Section 1.

Neither the united States in Congress assembled, nor any State of this Confederacy, shall have power to abridge, regulate, or license, a man’s right to take a wife, for men shall always be free to marry wives, without restriction and without permission from ecclesiastical or secular authorities, but, for the resulting marriage, whether confarreatio, or coemptio in manum, or usus, or any other form, with or without manus, and with or without a vow, every State shall issue certificates upon presentment of statements or affidavits by the man and his wife, which shall certify the marriage and its form, and such certificates, if available, shall be used in all marriage controversies at law, which controversies shall be judged according to the marriage form and the covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations or expectations that were made and entered into by the persons involved.

This section ought to be considered a restoration, for in the beginning marriage was ordained unto man (and not unto woman) by God:

and again

verily I say unto you

that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God

for marriage is ordained of God unto man [not woman]

wherefore

it is lawful that he [man] should have one wife

and they twain shall be one flesh

and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation

and that it might be filled with the measure of man

according to his creation before the world was made

(D&C 49:15-17)

So, at the beginning of time, God gave to man a right to take a wife. He (man) could do it under his own power and authority. He didn’t need God’s permission, nor permission from other men, or from governments or anything. This authority and right to take a wife was in him alone.

(Now, I will not explain in this post exactly what marriage is, and although I have written on this blog much about marriage, I have yet to tell what it is, and for those of you who have read my previous writings, don’t think you know what I teach from my previous writings, because these teachings are not there, but are yet to be published…)

Anyway, Section 1 restores this right and power and authority, which was had from the very beginning. Another thing it restores is the power of manus. Manus existed from the beginning and was the only form of marriage practiced by man from the start. Manus was the form given to men by God. Later on, a new form, developed by man, came forth, which was marriage without manus. As man had a right to marriage, he also had a right to the form of marriage he chose, therefore with or without manus were equally valid forms of marriage. Up until quite recently, almost all marriage was assumed to be with manus, but there has been a radical shift in the laws and in the interpretations of the judges, and now all marriage is assumed to be without manus. The LDS temple ceremony, however, is manus marriage, keeping the ancient form. Thus, there is a huge contradiction, because the temple sealing is with manus but the civil portion of the ceremony is considered to be without manus.

Also anciently, all marriage was without a vow*, and all marriage was considered to be without a vow. Taking a wife without a vow was the form of marriage God gave to man at the beginning, but, as man had a right, he later added a form of marriage with a vow. When a man takes a wife with a vow, he vows to [fill in the blank]. When a man takes a wife without a vow, he doesn’t promise a thing. At some point in history, marriage with vows became the norm and every marriage was considered, and still is, to be entered into with a vow (by the man). Again, the LDS temple ceremony keeps the ancient form of marriage, and thus all temple marriage sealings are entered into by the man without a vow, yet the civil law considers that marriage as made with a vow (of monogamy, specifically) anyway.

The disharmony between the LDS temple ceremony and the civil law comes because the LDS Church requires a marriage license from the State before they will marry or seal people in the temple. The marriage license is marriage by privilege, without manus and with an (assumed and unstated) vow (of monogamy).

The NAC, then, restores the right to marry, as well as the ancient forms of with manus and without a vow, but also keeps the more recent forms of without manus and with a vow. In other words, men are given their full rights in marriage, and can decide what is best for them, or which form of marriage is best for them to enter into. Currently, men do not have such a choice, but must choose only one form: without manus and with a vow.

(* The Nephites, although commanded by God not to take more than one wife, did not marry with a vow. Those Nephites who engaged in polygamy broke God’s commandment, but did not commit adultery.)

No marriage license

The NAC forbids marriage licenses for marriage by right. Notice that I wrote “marriage by right.” The NAC does not prohibit “marriage by privilege.” A marriage license is a marriage privilege, granted by the State. It gives one permission to do something that otherwise would be illegal to do. It can be granted and it can be revoked. If a man wants to marry by privilege, he may still do so under the NAC, by paying the State some money and getting a marriage license. But if he wants to marry by right, he needs no permission or license from any entity. Perhaps you might wonder, “Why in the world would a man choose to marry by privilege if he can marry by right?” Well, if the woman he wants to marry refuses to marry him unless he gets a marriage license (marriage by privilege) and he really wants this woman, he might do that. Marriage by privilege, of course, means that you marry without manus and with a vow, and also that the State is the arbitrator in the case of divorce, etc. So, the NAC will still allow marriage licenses.

The State certifies

Another restoration from the very beginning is the role of the State as certifying agent. That’s right, in the very beginning, according to my understanding, the man entered into a marriage with manus and without a vow and whatever government he was under acknowledged his marriage as validly performed under his own authority. The governments of the world, in the ancient world, were servants of the men in this regard. They recognized that all men had power and authority in and of themselves from the very beginning to marry wives and recognized all such marriages as marriages. They never did as States do today and refused to recognize this or that marriage because there was no marriage license. Such nonsense, committed by the governments of today, is a usurpation of masculine authority, which has occurred over time until the States of today now totally control marriage and man has no more power or authority over it.

The NAC, then, restores these ancient orders by taking the usurped masculine powers from the State and giving it back to men. The effect of this can only be that marriage will increase among men again, for many men are avoiding marriage because it is no longer beneficial to them. It has become a raw deal, one in which the risks out way the benefits. Once the NAC is installed, marriage will be a benefit and blessing to men again, and they will begin to marry again in droves, choosing whichever form they deem best for them.

Same-sex marriage (SSM)

What of same-sex marriage? Well, the NAC doesn’t address same-sex marriage, except for this part:

Article X. Section 5.

As the decisions of the supreme court of the former national government were made according to that law which was the United States Constitution and its treaties, which law is no longer binding upon the States, nor upon the people thereof, neither shall such decisions be binding upon any of the States, nor upon their people.

Now, under the USC, which doesn’t mention marriage, at all, the Supreme Court was able to determine that the U.S. Constitution did not allow plural marriages. Under the USC, which doesn’t mention marriage, at all, the Supreme Court was able to determine that the U.S. Constitution allows a man and another man, or a woman and another woman, to be married. The U.S. Constitution, which doesn’t mention marriage, at all, apparently still has much to say about which forms of marriage it permits, and which it doesn’t, without ever using the words “marry” or “marriage.” The USC, then, is a magical document with magical powers beyond my comprehension. But thank goodness the Supreme Court can comprehend such magical things! Perhaps it is because they themselves are wizards performing some sort of magic?

The NAC, on the other hand, is not magical. It takes a simplified approach. It encodes heterosexual marriage as a right of man and does not seek to restrict that right in any way. It also does not mention anything other than marriage by right. Therefore, under the NAC, States are still free to permit SSM (by issuing a marriage license), or ban it altogether (by refusing to issue a marriage license); free to permit polygamy (by issuing a marriage license) or ban it (by refusing to issue a marriage license). But they are not free to restrict in any way man’s right to heterosexual marriage and are required to recognize such marriages, as governments did anciently.

So, the recent decision of the Supreme Court on SSM is null and void under the NAC, meaning that SSM will become a State’s matter, each State deciding whether they will permit (license) SSM or not.

Divorce under the NAC

The NAC changes the game for divorce, too, at least for manus marriages:

Article III. Section 3.

No State shall have power to divorce men who exercise their right to marry wives with manus, from their wives, nor shall the right and power of such men to issue a writ of divorcement, on their own authority, be abridged or regulated in any way, and such writs shall be binding and valid and final and unalterable decrees in the eyes of the law, so that the law shall view a wife so divorced as loosed from the law of her husband.

This is yet another restoration, for anciently there was no power (outside of the man himself) to divorce a man who married with manus, from his wife. Only he (the man) had power to divorce, using the same power he used to marry: his own. Thus, the power to divorce wives was always in men from the beginning. When Moses allowed men to issue bills of divorcement, he did not confer any more authority than men already had. He just gave them divine permission to use their rights, power and authority in this way.

Now, under the USC, there is an unfavorable environment for men to marry. Why? Because if they marry by privilege with a marriage license, without manus and with a vow, and the marriage goes south, they can lose their house, their money, their kids and even their liberty (jail time). The risks far out way the benefits of current marriage practices under the USC and many men are walking away. The NAC, though, creates a favorable environment for men to marry, because they not only get to set all the terms of the marriage from the get-go, as men did anciently, but also all the terms of the divorce, even controlling whether a divorce can happen or not. This minimizes, or altogether eliminates, risk and gives men who marry by right (with manus) only benefits. Men will not walk away from such marriage, but will rush into it, reversing all current marriage and divorce trends. New marriage statistics will shoot sky-high and divorce statistics will become nearly non-existent, under the NAC.

State divorces still can happen

The NAC doesn’t speak on other forms of divorce. A man is still free to marry by privilege and go through the courts for a divorce and lose everything. The NAC doesn’t say you can’t sell yourself to the State and then get dragged through the mud by a wife wanting a divorce. Some men are masochists by nature, so the NAC leaves intact all these other forms and merely gives men more choices, while still allowing the masochists their fun.

Conferral of citizenship by manus

Article XII. Section 2.

Men who are natural-born citizens of any State, that marry wives by right, with manus, shall have power to confer naturalized citizenship upon their wives, provided a wife first passes an English proficiency test and enters into a covenant to obey, honor and sustain the laws of the State of which her husband is a resident, both of which shall be administered by the State of which her husband is a resident; and such men shall naturalize their wives by issuing a writ of citizenship, which writ shall be certified by the State of which her husband is a resident, which certified writ shall be binding and valid in the eyes of the law.

This also is a restoration, for this power existed in olden days and in ancient times. Thus the NAC returns these stolen powers and rights back to the men and codifies them. All of these things, taken together, rearrange the centers of power found in the national and State governments, creating a new center of power and jurisdiction, held by men, which really isn’t a new jurisdiction, but an old jurisdiction, for men always held these rights and powers and jurisdictions, in ancient times and from the beginning.

This stuff is in the NAC because I wrote it with a view of the restoration of all things. It may not seem readily apparent just how important these things are, but their effect will be huge in both shackling the State, re-empowering the people and in furthering the restoration of all things.

Conclusion

The marriage sections of the NAC, I suppose, will be controversial, but they need not be, for they do not force change in current practices, merely adding ancient practices to the modern ones, giving people many more options. Feel free to disagree on any point mentioned in this post. Bring your strongest reasons against the NAC and let’s have an open debate. And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

(9) to abolish the abomination of general warrants forever, the right of the people to be secure and private in their persons, houses, papers, data, metadata, communications, and all other effects, whether invisible, intangible or otherwise, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but from a judge, upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized;

NAC Article II, Section 2.10

(10) the right of grand juries to file presentments shall not be abridged or regulated;

USC Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

NAC Article II, Section 2.11-2.15

(11) no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land, air or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;

(12) no person shall be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;

(13) the right to remain silent shall not be violated, and shall be self-executing, being claimed merely by refusing to speak or communicate, and no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself nor to communicate in any way;

(14) no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

(15) private property shall not be taken for public use;

NAC Article II, Section 2.16

(16) in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed to be innocent, until proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be guilty, and the government shall have the burden of proof, not the accused;

USC Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

NAC Article II, Section 2.17-2.19

(17) in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation;

(18) in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him;

(19) in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to have the assistance of counsel for his defense, but there shall be no compulsory process for obtaining witnesses, neither for the accused nor for the prosecution, for the conscription of witnesses shall be abolished forever;

NAC Article II, Section 2.20

(20) the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended;

USC Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

NAC Article II, Section 2.21

(21) in suits at common law, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of this Confederacy, than according to the rules of the common law;

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

NAC Article II, Section 2.23

(23) as it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, slavery and involuntary servitude shall not exist within any of these United States nor within any place subject to any of their jurisdictions;

NAC Article II, Section 2.24

(24) the right of the people to nullify a law by their voice shall not be abridged;

Okay, so here I go…

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.9 vs. USC’s 4th Amendment

Section 2.9 restores both the intent of the 4th Amendment and corrects its deficiencies. The intent is included as “to abolish the abomination of general warrants forever.” Had that wording been in the 4th Amendment, we wouldn’t have general warrants today, yet as everyone should now know, they are still being issued. Deficiency number one is corrected by the wording: “data, metadata, communications, and all other effects, whether invisible, intangible or otherwise.” Basically, that covers everything, making absolutely no room to wiggle around the restriction. Deficiency number two is corrected by the wording, “but from a judge”. Requiring an unbiased judge to be the one that decides what is or is not probable cause does away with the current tyrannical practice which allows biased people to decide the same. The NAC’s wording comes out the winner on this one.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.10 vs. USC’s nothing

The USC has nothing on this. Current practice removes the right of grand juries to file presentments. The NAC restores it. Why is that important? Because grand juries have the power to root out corruption in all levels of government, by filing presentments. Take away this right, and government corruption can thrive unchecked. So, the NAC re-empowers grand juries, making sure that the new government established by the NAC, stays just as squeaky clean as the day it is born. Under the NAC, government corruption can and will be targeted and destroyed by grand juries.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.11-2.15 vs. USC’s 5th Amendment

Section 2.11-2.12 is almost identical to the wording in the 5th Amendment. But Section 2.13 expands the Amendment’s wording, “nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”, into a self-executing right to remain silent. This, then, is the Miranda right made self-executing. It is kind of retarded to say that you must expressly state that you are going to exercise your right to remain silent before you are considered exercising your right to remain silent by remaining silent. So the NAC corrects this lunacy. Section 2.14 has the same wording as the 5th Amendment. But Section 2.15 alters things quite a bit by leaving off the words, “without just compensation.” What does this do? It eliminates eminent domain.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.16 vs. USC’s nothing

Hear about all those university students being accused and presumed to be guilty before being proven innocent? Well, that is the future we are heading into. That is what is being planned and worked toward. That is what tyrants want for us. The NAC nips this trend in the bud before it really gets going.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.17-2.19 vs. USC’s 6th Amendment

Section 2.17-2.18 is more or less the same as the 6th Amendment, but Section 2.19 makes a very big change by abolishing the conscription of witnesses, for both prosecution and defense. In effect it does the opposite that the 6th Amendment does, for the 6th Amendment allows the defense to have the same compulsory power that the prosecution has. But, as such compulsory power is intrinsically evil, the NAC does away with this abomination altogether. This shows, yet again, that the NAC is superior to the U.S. Constitution in every single particular.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.20 vs. USC’s Art.I.Sec.9.Para.2

Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution says the following:

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Section 2.20, has the same wording, but leaves off the exception. Also, even foreigners have access to this privilege:

This Confederacy is also created to ensure that that principle of freedom, which maintains rights and privileges, which is justifiable before God, and which belongs to all mankind, be befriended, be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, citizens and foreigners alike, and be supported throughout the United States.

What would this do to the current practice of indefinitely detaining “illegal combatants”? Like I previously stated on this blog, the NAC completely destroys tyranny.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.21-2.23 vs. USC’s 7th, 8th and 13th Amendments

Section 2.21 is essentially the same as the 7th Amendment, except it leaves off the wording, “where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars.” Section 2.22 is precisely the same as the 8th Amendment. Section 2.23 is essentially the same as the 13th Amendment.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.24 vs. USC’s nothing

Now, this Section 2.24 is a doozy. A DOOZY. The right to nullify a law by the voice of the people is such a gigantic power, that this little bit here alone, once read by the powers that be, will give them nightmares and they will use every means within their power to stop the NAC from becoming the supreme law of the land. This allows the people to nullify taxes (!) and anything else they think is wrong! Simply put, this section says that ultimately, the people are the ones in control, and no law the majority disagrees with can oppress the people, for they have the final say in all matters. The tyranny of the shrill minority cannot oppress the majority because of this section.

Conclusion

These sections of the NAC, (listed here and also in the first two parts of this series), contain “the constitution of the land” established by the Lord. The constitution of the land, spoken of in the revelations, is the Bill of Rights, as I wrote 8 years ago. (See What the Lord has said about the Constitution?) The NAC includes the Bill of Rights, but corrects them and fully restores them, and adds other rights which fully empower the people against any and all tyranny that might show its head in the new Confederacy. So, the installation of the NAC does not destroy the constitution of the land, but actually more fully establishes it. The NAC, then, is essentially, a sort of new Title of Liberty.

In the next installment of this series, I will move on to Article III of the NAC. Feel free to disagree on any point mentioned in this post. Bring your strongest reasons against the NAC and let’s have an open debate. And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.

(4) no person or thing shall be quartered or installed in any house without the consent of the owner, nor shall any device or technology be used to spy, eavesdrop or intrude the senses remotely upon the people;

USC Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

NAC Article II, Section 2.5-2.8

(5) there shall be no law against a man’s belief, nor any law which shall bring men on to unequal grounds, but a man shall be judged and punished only for the crimes which he has done, even for his infringement upon the rights and liberties of others;

(6) no law respecting an establishment of religion shall be made, nor any prohibiting or regulating the free practice thereof;

(7) that censorship by government and its officials upon the private sector be abolished forever, no law abridging or regulating the freedom of speech, or of the press, shall be made;

(8) the rights of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, and for redemption, shall not be abridged or regulated, and all such importunities shall be heard and investigated for merit speedily, and if found to have merit, shall be addressed according to the amount of damages which have been sustained, both of character and personal injuries, as well as real property;

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.4 vs. USC’s 3rd Amendment

The 3rd Amendment was to stop the government from putting eyes and ears via soldiers in the people’s houses, to learn who was pro-government and who was anti-government. It performed its function when it was first written, but technology has outpaced its words. The government no longer needs to put soldiers in a person’s house to find out what people are saying and doing in their homes. They’ve got remote devices that can do this. So, the 3d Amendment is, essentially, useless as it is currently written. Nevertheless, the principle or reason for its existence is still very important.

Section 2.4 of the NAC Article II re-words the principle given in the 3rd Amendment, so that it actually has power to stop the government from snooping in people’s houses. The government must, at all times, be completely in the dark as to what the heck people are saying and doing in their own homes, or how they feel or think about the government. Remember the Zoramites?

And it came to pass that after the more popular part of the Zoramites had consulted together concerning the words which had been preached unto them, they were angry because of the word, for it did destroy their craft; therefore they would not hearken unto the words.

And they sent and gathered together throughout all the land all the people, and consulted with them concerning the words which had been spoken.

Now their rulers and their priests and their teachers did not let the people know concerning their desires; therefore they found out privily the minds of all the people.

And it came to pass that after they had found out the minds of all the people, those who were in favor of the words which had been spoken by Alma and his brethren were cast out of the land; and they were many; and they came over also into the land of Jershon. (Alma 35:3-6)

Technology has emasculated the power of the 3rd Amendment, but Section 2.4 is fully empowered to deal with technology. The government is shackled by it. The Constitution fully fails on this one and the NAC comes out the clear winner.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.5 vs. USC’s nothing

Under the Constitution we get hate crimes: people punished not only for their crimes, but also because they held certain beliefs while they did their crimes. Under the NAC, we just get crimes. The criminal can believe what he wants. The NAC only cares about the crime. (As should all the other laws.) Under the NAC, there could be no such thing as a hate crime, only crime.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.6 vs. USC’s 1st Amendment

There is not much difference between Section 2.6 and the 1st Amendment. Except that the word “exercise” is replaced with the word “practice” and the word “regulated” is inserted. And also except that those minor word changes fully stop the government from prohibiting a person from practicing their religion, or regulating that practice in any way. You know, like the current regulation that the government does today, such as stopping Mormons from practicing their religion in taking plural wives? So, Section 2.6 would actually allow Mormons to fully practice D&C 132, and any and all other revelatory practices that may come, such as animal sacrifice. (Remember, that practice is supposed to be coming back as a part of the Restoration.) Just a few minor word changes that do nothing much, except to allow God’s people to obey His commandments.

So, the Constitution fails on this one, too.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.7 vs. USC’s 1st Amendment

Again, there is not much difference between Section 2.7 and the 1st Amendment, except for the addition of the words, “that censorship by government and its officials upon the private sector be abolished forever.” Why would those additional words be so important? Because they explain who is being prohibited. The prohibition is not to stop the private sector from speaking their minds, nor from censoring their own privately published publications; no, it is solely to stop GOVERNMENT from censoring the private sector. That changes everything, doesn’t it?

But, under the Constitution, and under the 1st Amendment, since the entity being prohibited is not stated there, we get all sorts of governmental powers being employed to stop people and private organizations from speaking their minds and writing what they want, or from censoring or not censoring their own publications. So, the NAC wins again. Under the NAC, government can’t censor the private sector in any way. No regulation, whatsoever. That is the NAC standard. It shackles the government and frees the people. People then, are free to censor their own publications, and also to speak their minds, even if it is against the government. Now, that is true freedom. The Constitution fails and the NAC wins. Again.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.8 vs. USC’s 1st Amendment

Section 2.8 adds a whole bunch of words that basically expand the right to petition into a right to get the government to actually do something, if the petition has merit. Under the 1st Amendment, sure, you can petition all you want, but the government doesn’t have to do a darn thing. Not even do an investigation. Which would you prefer? A right to merely petition, or a right to petition and get an investigation started, and if there is merit, get something done? The Constitution fails, yet again.

In conclusion

The list of rights given in Section 2.4-2.8 covers government snooping, government attaching additional penalties to crimes because of a criminal’s belief, government stopping people from practicing their religion, government censorship, and government not correcting grievances. This NAC section takes these issues and fully deals with them. The Constitution does not.

Both this post and the previous one prove that the U.S. Constitution is insufficient to deal with the tyrants currently ruling over America today. And what does the Lord say about when the wicked rule?

I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free. Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn. (D&C 98:8-9)

The NAC, on the other hand, both empowers the people with their full rights, and also shackles the government, much more fully than the Bill of Rights does. The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution as an after thought. The nationalists that wrote the Constitution were against the Bill of Rights. They didn’t think one was needed. But the federalists won the day and got these governmental restrictions added. Thank the Lord that they did. But the Bill of Rights, as good as they are, are still not good enough. They are mere abridgments of the full rights of man. The NAC corrects this deficiency and lists the full rights. This allows the government to be fully shackled, so that tyranny cannot even get a toe in. The NAC is one of those laws that the Lord referred to, which makes the people free. It is superior to the Constitution because, under the NAC, there can be no rulers, only servants. Thus, there can be no wicked ruling under the NAC.

I will go over other NAC sections in future posts. Feel free to disagree on any point mentioned in this post. Bring your strongest reasons against the NAC and let’s have an open debate. And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.

(1) as a well-armed populace, skilled in the use of all weapons, is essential for the security of the United States—in order to wage warfare against any enemy, foreign or domestic, that should threaten any of their rights—the right of the people to make, keep, bear and carry all manner of weapons of every kind, openly or concealed, shall not be infringed nor regulated;

(2) all men shall be justified in defending themselves, their wives, their children, their friends, their neighbors, their property, their homes, their lands, their country, their government, their rights, their privileges, their liberties, their religion and their all, and the all of their neighbors, even unto bloodshed, from the unlawful assaults and encroachments of all persons in times of exigency, where immediate appeal cannot be made to the laws, and relief afforded;

(3) because of the extreme danger posed to liberty, there shall be no standing army in times of peace, and military conscription shall be abolished forever;

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.1 vs. USC’s 2nd Amendment

Sec.2.1 creates a super-armed society with no regulation by any branch of government. No permits or licenses can be required of the people. They are unrestricted in all ways. They can even make their own weapons. Sec.2.1 covers every kind of weapon, including firearms and swords and everything else. The purpose of this right is given as warfare, both to enemies foreign and domestic, to protect all the other rights of the people.

The 2nd Amendment creates a partially armed society, regulated by the Federal and State governments. You need permits and licenses. You are denied access to certain types of weapons and certain types of ammunition. You cannot make your own weapons without permission and regulation. The 2nd Amendment only covers firearms, not swords, so that no one can go around bearing a sharpened sword, etc. The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is debated, some believing it is only to allow people to hunt, and others believing it is just for self-defense, and others believing it is for warfare.

Under the 2nd Amendment, the police state thrives. Jack-booted thugs can and do regularly enter into homes in unannounced raids. An agenda of gun control and regulation is promoted, with the end goal of disarming the people, all except for the police and other governmental authorities. People actually do have their weapons (private property) routinely confiscated. (Remember Katrina?) People are also taught to rely upon the police for protection. And criminals, who go after the weak and unarmed, are able to perform all manner of crimes. All of this makes the 2nd Amendment extremely weak in its protections.

On the other hand, the super-armed society created by Sec.2.1 (and Sec.2.2) entirely does away with the police state. Literally everyone is armed, or assumed to be armed, to the teeth. The government is completely in the dark as to what weapons the people have, how many weapons they have, how much ammo they have, etc. The people are free to conceal their weapons on their person, therefore, the only way to know is when they are bearing weapons openly, but that is not an accurate measurement, as a person may also have additional concealed weapons. This unknown variable creates an environment unfavorable to a police state, and also to other types of criminals. Simply put, the government authorities must at all times assume they are outmanned and outgunned by the citizens that surround them. Everyone, essentially, becomes a potential threat with no clear advantage to the police state, because citizens live everywhere and thus, surround all the cops. The authority of the police state is one of intimidation, the firearms of the police being a perceived threat. “Do what I say or this firearm you see at my side is going to come out and point at you.” But a super-armed society is not intimidated, neither by police nor by criminals. On the contrary, a super-armed society intimidates all police and also all criminals.

Thus, crime increases under the 2nd Amendment, with a corresponding increase in the police state, to deal with all the crime, whereas crime will decrease and almost entirely be eliminated under Sec.2.1, with a corresponding decrease in the police state, until the police state disappears altogether.

In conclusion, the 2nd Amendment can be considered as an abridgment of the real weapons right. It is better than nothing, but still falls short of the actual right. Whereas Sec.2.1 is a full restoration of the weapons right held by the ancient people of this land, and also by those who lived at the beginning of time. The restoration of this right fully secures the land from tyranny, both from non-governmental and governmental criminals.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.2 vs. USC’s nothing

That’s right, the USC has nothing in it for defense. There is no right to defense in the United States Constitution, whatsoever. Nevertheless, apart from the USC, there are federal and State laws that put forth a right of women to defend themselves from other women, and from men, and that put forth a right of men to defend themselves from other men, but not from women.

In fact, if any woman attacks a man, hitting him, slapping him, pulling his hair, spitting on him, kicking him, pushing him, throwing his property, verbally insulting him, destroying his property, and so on, even publicly, first of all, no one would help the man out (not even off-duty cops), secondly, the men in the area would think the man was a wimp, allowing himself to get beaten up by a girl, and third, some of the women in the area would cheer, and all of the women would think that the man had the beating coming to him and that he must be at fault (even though they have no idea of the circumstances.)

But if that man were to attempt to defend himself against her, even if it was only to restrain her from hitting him again, all the men in the area who are what are known as white knights would immediately jump to the woman’s defense and start pounding on the man, because of the rule they were taught by their single, or separated or divorced mothers, (and even some of their fathers), namely, that it is always wrong to hit a woman. He defending himself against her attack would cause all to view him as a monster and as “not a man.” Should the cops be called, they would arrest him, and not her, even though she attacked him and he only defended himself, and he would be the one going to jail. Thus, not only society says that a man does not have a right to defend himself against a woman, but also the law says so. Think I’m wrong? Watch this:

Notice that in the video the off-duty cop didn’t help him. Also notice that the psychology professor says, “Men create more damage, but women hit more than men do.”

Now, in olden times and more particularly in ancient times (and I am writing here according to my understanding), a man had a right to defend himself against all persons, even women. Not only did he have a right to defend his person, but also his honor, against attacks, be they verbal or physical. Thus, when a man was verbally insulted or abused, and I don’t mean an argument or difference of opinion or a debate, but when words were used to insult and abuse the man, the man felt pain, for his honor was under a humiliating attack and thus the insults were considered fighting words. In other words, although only words were used, it was nevertheless considered a fight. Such a man had three options. If he were a Christian saint, then he might simply suffer the persecution (what we today would call harassment) and just turn the other cheek, and no matter how many words he was afflicted with, he would not retaliate in kind. Nevertheless, he had the right to defend his honor, and his second option was to retaliate in kind, afflicting verbal insults upon the attacker, so that his enemy would become humiliated, too, and thus, he might “win the fight” by getting the public observers to side with him as the winner. But there was also a third option, and that was to take it to the next level, and to physically stop the attacker from continuing to insult and abuse him verbally. This was perfectly acceptable in the ancient world, and also in olden times, because if a man was so brash as to insult another man, then he had to be able to deal with the consequences of his actions, which might lead to a physical altercation, according to the right of the man attacked to defend himself and his honor. In other words, the right of a man to defend his honor from verbal abuse, even physically, was universally recognized. This was the prerogative of a man.

Anciently (and also in olden times), it was unmanly for a man to allow another man to verbally abuse him, without defending oneself, either verbally or physically. Thus, when insults were thrown about by men, it might lead to a duel of pistols or a clash of swords, to the wounding or death of one of them, for a man’s honor was everything to him and it was to be defended, at all cost. But over time, pistol duels were outlawed, as well as gunfights and sword fights. Now, all that is left, legally, is fisticuffs, and even that comes with a penalty from the law.

Anciently, if any woman were to verbally assault a man’s honor, insulting and abusing him with words, she “crossed the line” into man’s territory, for women were to act as women and men were to act as men. Men could insult a man, and then they would have to face the consequences, but women were not expected or allowed to act as men and insult men, but if they did, they were always treated with the very same treatment that other men received, except with one difference. This similar treatment of women, by men, when the women acted as men, put a permanent stop to all women abusing men, either verbally or physically.

It is a universal fact that men are mightier in every way than women. An average man put into a fair fight with an average woman, and neither of them pulling their punches, would result in either the critical wounding or death of the female. All females crumple under male power. The Hollywood myth of the dominant, strong female that can kick a man’s butt is merely a clever fiction meant to deceive the masses. You could put 50 females in a line, each one facing that man in a fair fist fight, and that man would destroy each and every female, from the first to the last. The male body and his testosterone fueled muscles gives almost god-like strength to him, or at least, that is what it seems like to any female who has ever been hit hard by a male. All females, once hit hard by a male, cease their bickering.

Now, the ancients knew this, and they knew that male strength is much too powerful to be used in its full capacity, upon females, as it was used upon male antagonists, but they also knew that unless a woman is checked by male power, she would continue to verbally and physically assault and abuse men, for this is the nature of unchecked women. So, the ancient solution was to use the closed hand (the fist) against males and the open hand (the palm slap) against women. The muscles on the palm of the hand softened the blow, so that even though the slap was delivered in a hard manner, so as to make a point, it was not enough to destroy the woman. To the woman on the receiving end, it still felt like a brick wall had fallen on top of her, and the realization that this was only a slap, caused every woman to respect, submit to, and not fight, male power and authority. In other words, the ancient women, so checked, fully respected the men around them, once they felt just what kind of god-like power and strength God had endowed to the males of the species.

Now, this was the way of the ancients, according to their right of defense, and this practice created peace between the sexes, for the women, once checked, submitted to the men and did not fight them, and the men, for their part, did not initiate much violence towards women, because their women were mostly submissive. Violence towards men by women was virtually non-existent, and the little insulting words thrown about by women were quickly stopped by this hard slapping check by the men. This was, for the most part, the extent of the domestic violence.

Domestic violence, however, in modern times, is widespread. Women hide behind, and promote, the false teaching of “men should never hit women” in order to get away with hitting and otherwise abusing men. And then the same statistics show up, namely, that women initiate the lion’s share of the violence and arguments and verbal abuse, except that they are never checked, because the law will throw a man into jail if he makes the attempt to put his woman in her place. This causes pent up anger in the emasculated males, as the abuse continues, until in some males, instead of a checking slap that would have put an abrupt end to the female-initiated violence, we get an explosive reaction that destroys the female. In other words, the males that do such violence actually end up looking upon these women as fully male and so exert full male power at them, destroying them.

Now, I will not expound the heart of the matter in this post, for that is not the topic. Suffice it to say that devilish forces have removed the ancient rights of men to defend themselves and their honor from all persons, including from women, and thus, in this emasculated state, the prophecy of Isaiah is brought to pass:

As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths. (Isaiah 3:12)

Thus, the devil has turned the ancient order upside down. But the NAC turns it right-side up again, through restoration, by restoring the ancient rights of man to defend himself from all persons.

From all persons

Remember those jack-booted thugs dressed in the garb of the State’s authority? Well, Sec.2.2 allows citizens to defend themselves and their property, too, against all those unannounced raids. Instead of a man opening fire on DEA agents raiding his house and then going to prison, the man would be set free, for he was merely exercising his right. This curtails all unlawful encroachments, no matter where they originate. Men are re-empowered to defend their all, against all, and the police state suddenly cowers before all the masculine power the State stole from the men. Raids will stop. Girlfriends and wives destroying a man’s property because they are upset with him, without any consequences, will stop. Even conflict in general will largely cease, because a super-armed society in conjunction with the right to defend creates a powder-keg of masculine power that is unfavorable to conflict. In other words, civility becomes the societal law, because any conflict can potentially escalate into great bodily harm or even death. Contentious persons, of both sexes, will cease their contention quite rapidly, or be eliminated. It just isn’t wise to be contentious in such a society.

Bad cops also will leave the police force, or never enter it to begin with. Cops need to be extra kind and polite and considerate and careful not to trample on people’s rights when dealing with super-armed citizens who have a right to defend their all against all persons from encroachments. Any infringement by a cop upon a citizen may not make it to the judge. This will cause only the manliest and pleasantest of men to take the position of police officer, because of the unfavorable environment to nervous and contentious men. A cop’s main job in such an environment would be to show up and protect the nabbed criminal from the citizens who have caught him in the act of the crime and have him pinned down at gun or sword point. The citizens themselves would be a sort of unofficial police force, for they are empowered to protect the all of their neighbors, too.

Abortion

A man can protect his all under Sec.2.2. This may be interpreted to include his unborn fetuses. NAC Article X., Section 5 reads:

As the decisions of the supreme court of the former national government were made according to that law which was the United States Constitution and its treaties, which law is no longer binding upon the States, nor upon the people thereof, neither shall such decisions be binding upon any of the States, nor upon their people.

This negates Roe vs. Wade and makes the legality of abortion a States issue. Nevertheless, Section 10 of the same Article says,

These articles of Confederation, and all the treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the united States in Congress assembled, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Laws or Constitution of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

So, the States will be bound to the NAC. Sec. 2.2 in conjunction with Article III. Section 2 may make a case for permission from the father being necessary before an abortion can be legally performed:

Neither the united States in Congress assembled, nor any State, shall have power to raise up a king over men, nor to exert kingly authority over them or their house, for it is not right to esteem one flesh above another, or that one man shall think himself above another, but every man alone shall bear rule in his own house; and as that which is governed by law is also preserved by law, whereas that which breaks a law, and abides not by law, but seeks to become a law unto itself, cannot be preserved by law, neither by mercy, justice, nor judgment, every man shall have power to set his house in order, having his children and house in subjection to him alone with all gravity, even as unto a king, according to the bounds and conditions of his law, that this shall be a land of liberty, and that every man shall enjoy his rights and privileges alike, and that every man shall set in order his family, and that every man shall bear his part.

Certainly that fetus could be considered part of the “all” of a man, and also part of his family. These things will be worked out in the courts, but the NAC provides a legal basis for the reproductive right of the father to extend its manly protection over his unborn offspring. And if the courts rule in this very way, that the father’s right to defend his all extends to his fetuses, then all men in this country can be empowered to save all these children, regardless of the legality of abortion in any State. Additionally, even if a woman tries to circumvent the law’s requirement of a father’s permission for abortion, by going to an illegal clinic, the father is still empowered to defend that unborn life, his all, even unto bloodshed, if you get my drift. This will create a very unfavorable environment for illegal abortion practitioners, as they may be faced with an irate and fully armed father seeking to protect his unborn young.

NAC’s Art.II.Sec.2.3 vs. USC’s nothing

Once again, the Constitution comes up flat. The USC allows for a standing army. And for military conscription. But the NAC disallows both.

Now, it may not be readily apparent just how important these three items are (Section 2.1-2.3) but together, they put a shackle on the State and any would-be tyrants in it. Despots and dictators and would-be tyrants need some things in order to tyrannize a populace. They need a standing army during peacetime. The USC gives it to them. The NAC doesn’t. They need military conscription, so as to rapidly expand their army by forcing men to fight for them. The USC gives it to them. The NAC doesn’t. They need the populace either fully disarmed or mostly disarmed, or at least regulated to the point where they could fully disarm them at some point through such regulations. The USC gives this to them. The NAC doesn’t. They need the men, representing the masculine power of the population, to be emasculated to the point that they can no longer defend themselves, legally, against anyone, but must rely upon the police and other armed State officials, for their defense and protection. The USC gives this to them. The NAC doesn’t. They need to have a police state in place, to intimidate and threaten the populace into submission. The USC gives it to them. The NAC doesn’t.

So, the USC supports tyranny, or allows it to flourish, while the NAC destroys it. Just this little bit of the NAC proves that the NAC is superior in every way to the USC, but I will go over other NAC sections in future posts. Feel free to disagree or debate on any point mentioned in this post. This is, after all, an open debate. And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.